|User since||July 17, 2007|
|Number of add-ons developed||0 add-ons|
|Average rating of developer's add-ons||Not yet rated|
DOA Rated 1 out of 5 stars
My experience with 15.01/16.0 confirms prior reviews.
There isn't anything related to it visible through the DOMi. It appears to not load any chrome/overlay.
I don't see how it could have passed any review. Even preliminary and/or superficial.
It doesn't deserve even 1 star for functionality. Although, It is a good idea.
0.7.13rc1 compatible with Greasemonkey Rated 5 out of 5 stars
Thanks for fixing Greasemonkey compatibility so quickly.This review is for a previous version of the add-on (0.7.12).
Useful for end-users Rated 5 out of 5 stars
Thanks for creating this add-on. It is a great example of filling a gap in, IMO, essential missing housekeeping functionality.
Adding Thunderbird compatibility would be appreciated.
I have a very large profile. It simply isn't possible to prevent "stuff" from happening . Adequate maintenance instrumentation and tools are doable, Over reliance on "nuke and reinstall" common in the windows world is passing the buck. That bags the end user.Adding invalidateCachesOnRestart to the runtime api addresses the issue. Unfortunately. that's in gecko 2,0. FF4 may soon be ready for prime-time. I haven't checked yet, but think it take more time for a TB/gecko 2.0 release.
Cavet Emptor Rated 1 out of 5 stars
Descriptions should be required.
IMO this extension is out of place. I doubt it will be here once reviewed.
A rating of zero stars should be allowd
IMPORTANT Security Information Rated 5 out of 5 stars
Google has issued a Safe Browsing Advisory for the top level domain hosting phproxy.org (ok.pe).
IMO this DOES NOT REFLECT ON on UrlbarExt or necessarily on phproxy.org. Just a heads up for the developer and fellow users.
UrlbarExt provides useful features, is highly/easily configurable and has worked flawlessly without interfering with Firefox and/other extensions (100+ installed).
Mixed results ... mostly good. Rated 4 out of 5 stars
I track memory (and all resource usage), performance and responsiveness closely. AFOM/Memory Fox generally helps, but not always.
I agree with most of the facts (not the tone) of an earlier review asserting windows memory management was more complicated then as explained in the addon description. AFOM/MF can minimize working set (in memory pages), but not directly cannot control or force release (return to OS) of allocated pages.
Minimizing working set does indirectly influence total allocated memory. Flushing pages to disk appears to result allocations concentrated on few pages, i.e.: better clustering/page alignment of related allocations.
I have seen rational if not consistent reductions of VM size. Slower increases leading to dynamic steady state for extended intensive browsing sessions.
There are times when VM size becomes inexplicably large. Immediate reductions tend to be limited, but there have been instances where reductions increased over time.
Minimizing working set tends improve responsiveness.
IMO the task manager/sidebar feature is unnecessary. It has interfered with normal operation of the task manager.
I'd like to see a future version extended to provide memory management/reduction system-wide.